Thursday, March 8, 2012

What is Harder?

Thank you to everyone for taking the time to read the Race Report from The Woodlands Marathon. It was an amazing day and it was awesome to be able to share it with all of you on the blog. Each of your comments were much appreciated!

One of the comments I wanted to address and see if the feedback is consistent with my answer. Here is the comment (highlighted in yellow):

Another Display of my Award Winning Editing/Photoshop Skills!

Nelly basically asked what is harder/more painful - Ironman or a Marathon?

What is funny is that this has been the most common question I have received since the race on Saturday. I have received a bunch of emails and phone calls from friends and they all have asked the exact same thing.

So, in my opinion, what is harder?

Marathon x 10.

Racing a Marathon is 26.2 miles of sheer agony. The last 25% of the marathon is by far the most pain I have ever experienced athletically. Something about the 26.2mi race that just utterly destroys the human body. It is the perfect distance for pain.

Now, notice I used the phrase "Racing" a Marathon. Six weeks ago I ran the Houston Marathon with my wife. It took us exactly one hour longer to complete than it did for me at the Woodlands Marathon. This was much easier for me that Ironman. In fact, I was running the next day with very little soreness.

With this in mind the answer is not really all that simple. In my N=1 experiences maybe I just did not race as hard during my lone Ironman and the comparisons are not even fair? No doubt that the marathon was more painful but was my effort the same for the Ironman?

Now I have confused myself.

Nelly, if it is okay with you, let's shelf my answer of "Marathon x 10" for now and I will get back to you at the end of August when I am done with Ironman Mont-Tremblant. Because I am going to race this sucker with all I got!

27 comments:

Not having done an Ironman but have completed two HIM and 3 marathons I can say that the Marathon was WAAAAAYYYYY harder than both HIMs. It wasn't even close the pain that I felt in the marathon in Vegas compared to the Austin 70.3

GOOD question....and honestly, if you "race" the Ironman correctly, it is a MONSTER and the marathon at the back end of the IM hurts as bad as the open marathon. I have done both...and raced both super hard...the open marathon forces you to go faster and it does hurt big and bad..but after racing the IM - especially in the extreme heat/conditions like Hawaii, the IM is hands down harder.

Ironman.Having done 16 marathons and actually "raced" a handful of them, I know what you mean by cruising vs. racing. I have never really raced an Ironman due to lack of training, but the pain level for my Ironman "cruise" equals my pain level for racing a marathon at the end.I think your first IM was more of a "leisurely cruise" since you didn't know what to expect. If it was a true "cruise" you might have compared it to your Woodlands marathon. If you redline IMMT I think you might chalk it up as the hardest thing you have ever done.But unless you think you can Kona qualify, I wouldn't recommend it.

I will never forget standing in line for a bus shuttle to the Chicago Marathon Expo in 2003 for my first marathon and having a guy tell us that an Ironman was less painful than a marathon. I remember walking away and being like "but, there's a marathon IN an Ironman". I thought that he was nuts.

For me, I don't race either. But of the two Ironman races I've completed, and the 6 marathons, I was WAY more sore after the marathons. Go figure.

Thanks for addressing the question! Main thing I can think of as to why you thought ironman was easier than the stand alone marathon is heartrate. Maybe if you weren't pushing yourself all out max effort the whole time during the ironman your body didn't feel red lined at all. Like you say, red lining your body during an entire marathon just destroys the body it seems like. But if you are racing your next ironman, that sounds more painful than racing a stand along ironman!

Well, I've gone 0 for 2 in the ironman, but I have run 13 marathons....

I do believe the marathon is hard, but it is also a learned skill. My first 7-8 marathons were frustrating, but around the 9th one I totally figured it out and put it all together. And my 12th one was pure heaven and was my fastest one to date. You've got to not only figure out how to run the course but master race nutrition.

I"m with you on this. I think unless you are an elite IM athlete, that effort is always going to be at a lower level than the effort you put into racing a marathon. Note I said racing, 'cause there are a heck of a lot of people who just run marathons these days.

I'll preface this by saying I've never done a triathlon...I've run two marathons (fall/winter 2011) and BQ'd.

But it seems like marathons might take a little bit more out of you because you can run your heart rate up in a higher range for that shorter amount of time. Whereas if you do an ironman, you probably have to keep your heart rate in a certain range in order to be able to sustain that type of activity for that length of time. Just a guess though!

And it totally depends on how hard you're racing obviously. I didn't push the hell out of my body on either of my marathons, so I could very well decide that an ironman is more difficult. We'll see...I want to do a half ironman later this year!

With over 60 marathons, having even raced a couple of them, I can tell you, that if it's your day racing a marathon is easy, I can tell you about leading a race into a small town and running was easy, it didn't hurt... but I can also tell you about sore feet and legs that didn't work, about how the clock just kept ticking and I couldn't get to the finish fast enough to ly down and 'cry'!!! While I have also done 2 ironmans I can't say I have raced them..., but I came the marathon I was sore and did a bit of walking, I didn't feel the clock was the enermy!

I can definitely see how you'd think racing a marathon could be harder then an IM. I mean in the IM you get to break everything up into their own categories and you focus on them overall with the marathon you've got the one single goal, puke threshold all the way. That's killer!

Having done both - I would say racing an Ironman is harder, and that is my version of "Racing" which is no where near Kona qualifying. If one was to actually RACE both distances, I am not sure how the Ironman would not be harder, given its length. Now racing a marathon versus completing an Ironman, totally different story. Just my 2 cents.

I agree! Well, I've only done 70.3s and am about to do my first Ironman this august, but I think running always feels a million times harder when not done off the bike. In marathon running, you start on cold legs and are more conscious of staying with a particular pace. But in a Triathlon, you're really warmed up by the time you reach the bike and ten to just run based on how you feel. Sometimes, if I get my legs going fast enough off the bike, they just kinda stay at that pace. Usually, by that time you're also just so thrilled to be past the swim and bike that your excitement for being "close to home" even if it's still a few hours away, is exhilarating.